Wednesday, December 31, 2014

Windsor City Councillor Hilary Payne admits he loathes handing over municipal powers to the province, but says the one exception might be provincial legislation to make fluoride mandatory in all Ontario drinking water.

“Good heavens they don’t have a huge amount of powers already,” he says. “The municipalities will always be subject to these pressure groups coming in and maybe some councils will do what Windsor did and give into it.”

Payne was one of three city councillors who voted against a motion to remove fluoride from the drinking water supply in Windsor, Tecumseh and LaSalle.

Now, Mississauga-Streetsville MPP Bob Delaney introduced a motion in the Ontario Legislature calling on the Liberal government to make fluoridation mandatory across Ontario. The motion has a broad range of support from residents, dentists and the Windsor-Essex County Health Unit, which argued against removing fluoride from local drinking water two years ago.

As for whether Windsor City Council would be willing to revisit the issue, Payne isn’t sure. It would take a two-thirds vote on council to pass a motion to reconsider, and then council would have to vote whether to re-introduce fluoride. Payne says it could be a difficult debate, possibly resulting in the status quo.

Ford City will stop adding fluoride to its drinking water when its water plant being built next year goes into service.

“This is a matter of removing a poison,” said Borough Manager Eden Ratliff. “And it's about the government not forcibly medicating our population.”

The American Dental Association endorses fluoridation as safe, effective and necessary for preventing tooth decay, but fluoride opponents say the chemical causes a range of health problems — from cancer to tooth enamel defects.

Ford City resident Marc Perella, who is among those opponents, was at the Monday meeting when council voted to eliminate fluoride from its water supply after broaching the subject several times in the past three years.

“I'm very happy. I believe we should have a choice whether we have fluoride in our water or not, and right now I don't,” Perella said. “I've got young kids. I don't think they should be drinking fluoride.”

Council agreed with that sentiment, voting 5-0 to remove the chemical it has added to its water for more than 60 years. Councilman Gene Banks was absent from the meeting.

“The question has become why? Why are we doing this?” said Council Vice President Jerry Miklos. “It's absolutely absurd in my opinion.”

Tuesday, December 30, 2014

What FAN means to
me

by Janet Nagel,
EdD

1) FAN is the go-to international
organization for information and networking in the world-wide campaign to end
the injustice and public health fiasco of fluoridation. FAN is a source of
support and inspiration for all of us who are committed to this
goal.2) Fluoridation will end in the US
when most people realize that they’ve been deceived—snookered, I like to say.
And there are so many other good words for it. Let’s use them: conned, duped,
hoodwinked, hornswoggled, hustled, snowed, taken in, tricked . . . because
fluoridation is humbug, absurd, a scam, a hoax, a boondoggle, a cult . .
.
Using old Ed Bernays’ insidious
mind-molding techniques, most health professionals, politicians and ordinary
folks have been convinced—against logic and common sense--that just a “tiny bit”
of a powerful protoplasmic poison miraculously protects everyone from the pesky
scourge of tooth decay. Of course, like the courtiers of that well-known naked
emperor, one has to be of superior intelligence to understand that constant
exposure to a tiny bit of an accumulative poison is actually salutary. Human
rights zealots, freedom fanatics, legalistic sticklers, science deniers,
simpletons, rabble-rousers and others are, of course, not able to grasp this
arcane concept and need to be continually beaten back by the enlightened elite
;)
I think this deeply ingrained insider
snobbery is a compelling force keeping the fluoridation belief system in place.
And, as a former believer, I know it takes a while to break out of that
constantly reinforced brainwashing--like deprogramming someone rescued from a
cult.
To break through the “insiderism,” I’ve
come to think maybe ridicule can be a potent tool. We can spotlight our public
health “geniuses,” who can’t distinguish phony science from real science, who
don’t know the difference between concentration and dose, who can’t tell human
rights from a ham sandwich or professional ethics from a hockey puck. Yes,
fluoridation promoters are sinister, but they’re also silly, pompous,
overwrought ignoramuses. And laughter has more impact than
frowns.3) In my child’s third year,
dentists in the Dental Faculty Practice at UNC Dental School in Chapel Hill, NC,
prescribed fluoride tablets and fluoride mouth rinse. The treatment needed to
be both topical and systemic, I was told. Being a well-schooled health
educator, I diligently followed the prescribed regimen. So, of course, when his
first permanent teeth emerged they were discolored by bright white flecks. They
were not attractive. The first few dentists I asked about this hemmed and
hawed. Finally one hesitantly told me it was dental fluorosis--from too much
fluoride. I was put out. No one ever told me that fluorosis was a possible
“side effect” of fluoride treatment. Not the grad school professors who sang
the praises of fluoridation, not the dentists who prescribed the treatments for
my child. We stopped all further use of fluoride, of course.
About that time we left NC to travel for
several years and gave up any thought of fluoride. In 1992 we had bought a
house in Bellingham, WA. I read in the paper that fluoridation of our water was
being proposed. I thought parents should be able to choose whether or not their
children are put at risk for dental fluorosis. My husband Harry and I went to
the city council meeting where it was going to be discussed. So did quite a few
other fluoridation objectors.
After the council meeting we all gathered
in the courthouse lobby. Anne Anderson and Richard Foulkes invited everyone to
meet at their home a few days later to discuss the situation. That was the
beginning of a 6-year collaboration, which stopped that fluoridation proposal in
Bellingham, defeated a pro-fluoridation city council candidate, and eventually
passed an ordinance prohibiting fluoridation in Bellingham. Anne and I made
several trips to the state capital to lobby against pro-fluoridation
legislation, and Anne and Richard became more widely involved in the efforts to
end this unethical, illogical and unhealthy practice.

I feel privileged to have been
mentored by Anne and Richard and also by John Lee who came to Bellingham to
assist us. Although Harry and I had to turn our focus to other things for a
number of years, fluoridation has remained a passion of mine. Back in North
Carolina, I now have some time to devote to it.
Janet Nagel, Ed.D., North Carolina.

Monday, December 29, 2014

Concerned Citizens Warned of Fluoride Dangers in the ’50s, but We’re Still Drinking It Anyway

Melissa Melton and Aaron Dykes

Activist Post

With renewed interest by activists, scientists and concerned citizens in removing fluoride from municipal water supplies across the country, it is useful to remember that fluoridation has always been controversial.

Even as use of the chemical was being introduced as a “benefit to teeth”, many people of the day were already armed with information to put them on guard and make them outraged at the ill conceived and perhaps nefarious scheme thrust upon the population.

The following is not an exhaustive account of the battle for fluoride, which has affected the long-term health of nearly everyone in the United States and much of the Western world whether they know it or not, but these newspaper clippings hold some interesting clues and fragments that to piece together more or less how this monstrosity came to be in spite of the fact that many people were sharply against it – and with good reason.

Much of the history of water fluoridation has been documented in detailed works including Dr. Paul Connett’s The Case against Fluoride and Christopher Bryson’s The Fluoride Deception.

December 29, 2014

At LANAP & Implant Center of Pennsylvania in Collegeville, PA and Williamsport, PA, Dr. David DiGiallorenzo and his team help families from throughout our community improve their dental health and overall well-being with an all-encompassing range of services and patient education resources. One of the ways that we help you stay informed involves sharing vital knowledge regarding water fluoridation, a problem that many may not necessarily understand completely. Today, we’d like to discuss some of the top facts you need to know about fluoride in tap water.Fluoridated Water: Causing More Harm than Good?
While many individuals and organizations may still continue to tout the oral health benefits of fluoride in water, recently published studies now say that the benefit of fluoride on enamel is negligible. In fact, the ultra-thin layer of fluorapatite deposited on the teeth by fluoridated tap water is only approximately six nanometers thick, an amount that has no proven benefit as an anti-cavity mechanism. The act of swallowing substantial amounts of fluoride may actually lead to a variety of serious health problems, including changes in the way the brain develops and functions.
This leads us to our next fact: Countries that practice water fluoridation do not have less tooth decay than those whose water is free of fluoride. On the contrary, tooth decay has seen a rather steady decline across the board in recent decades, even in countries where water fluoridation is not the standard. Add to this the fact that fluoride is a toxic drug that has never been approved as a supplement by the FDA, and you have the makings for an excellent case against the fluoridation of our nation’s water supply.Keeping Your Family Safe
To keep your loved ones healthy and to preserve strong, beautiful smiles, simply give us a call at ourCollegeville, PA or Williamsport, PA location today to schedule your visit with Dr. DiGiallorenzoand his team. At LANAP & Implant Center of Pennsylvania, we believe in helping our patients achieve and maintain lasting oral health and general wellness in ways that are conservative and as close to nature as possible. We will always take the time to answer your questions and address your concerns in a manner that is both respectful and easy to understand. We can’t wait to become your trusted partners in your continuing journey toward lifelong health.
Our state-of-the-art practice warmly welcomes families from throughout Collegeville, Williamsport, Bloomberg, Lock Haven, Sunbury, Pottstown, and beyond.

Monday, December 29, 2014

Results: The fluoride content of water, blood and urine was significantly elevated in the Kalahari group compared to the control. Surprisingly, a significant decrease in both cortical and trabecular bones was found in sheep chronically exposed to fluoride. Furthermore, osteoid parameters and the degree and heterogeneity of mineralization were increased. The latter findings are reminiscent of those found in osteoporotic patients with treatment-induced fluorosis. Mechanical testing revealed a significant decrease in the bending strength, concurrent with the clinical observation of fragility fractures in sheep within an area of environmental fluoride exposure.
Conclusions: Our data suggest that fluoride exposure with concomitant calcium deficit (i) may aggravate bone loss via reductions in mineralized trabecular and cortical bone mass and (ii) can cause fragility fractures and (iii) that the prevalence of skeletal fluorosis especially due to groundwater exposure should be reviewed in many areas of the world as low bone mass alone does not exclude fluorosis.

Sunday, December 28, 2014

Saturday, December 27, 2014

FluorideAlert.org

In 2014, after the FAN conference
held in DC in September, Chris Neurath (FAN’s science director), Quanyong Xiang
(author of one of the most important IQ studies from China), Paul Connett and
myself, presented this information (including the results of a detailed risk
assessment) to current Office of Water officials and received an encouraging
response.
It remains to be seen whether EPA will
take this opportunity to finally live up to its Principles of Scientific
Integrity and fulfill its mission of protecting public health. This will involve
admitting that their choice of severe dental fluorosis as the most sensitive end
point of fluoride’s toxicity in their determination of a new MCLG [Maximum
Contaminant Level Goal] for fluoride is just not tenable. Let’s be clear about
this, in several of the Chinese studies many children with lowered IQ have
exhibited milder categories of dental fluorosis, then the severe form chosen by
the EPA. This must make the lowering of IQ a more sensitive end point
than severe dental fluorosis.

If the EPA has the integrity to admit
this, good on them. If not, they should be prepared for a fight to the finish
from independent scientists and citizen fluoride fighters alike. We cannot
afford to lose the battle for integrity.

The resistance against water fluoridation might be a different story if the naturally occurring element of fluoride was added to our water. Fluoride is found in all natural waters, levels can be very high in groundwater, depending on a number of factors, such as the types of rocks and minerals of that region. Drinking water is the largest fluoride source.

Our tap water, on the other hand, is littered with hydrofluorosilicic Acid, a toxic industrial waste by-product that governments have been adding to our drinking water for over sixty years. Again, we’re not talking about the natural element of fluoride here, we are talking about industrial toxic waste.

What Exactly Are We Drinking?

So what exactly are we drinking? The substance added to our drinking water is called hydrofluorosilicic acid. It is a toxic waste substance created from the production of aluminum, fertilizer, steel and nuclear industries. It’s not the natural element of fluoride, again, it’s industrial toxic waste.

For example, in the Phosphate Mining & Production Industry, much of the hydrofluorosilicic acid occurs from strip-mined rock. The rock is broken up, placed in giant vats where sulfuric acid is also added to get rid of whatever phosphate (and other contaminants) are in the rock. While the phosphate is extracted, the contaminants used to be released into the atmosphere. This was creating more pollution, and killing animal and plant life...................

Fluoridation in the City of Prince George, British Columbia, Canada begun through an October 4, 1954 City resolution …will end December 31, 2014, 60 years after it began!

The first ever fluoridation non-binding opinion poll / referendum in Prince George was held November 15, 2014 and it has tonight been unanimously accepted by the new Mayor and full Council as binding, fairly expressing the will of informed people.
The unanimous decision to end fluoridation comes with the dismantling and removal of all fluoridation equipment and hazardous waste storage tanks.
City democracy took a very large, significant, hard won step forward in British Columbia this evening! For Canada and the rest of the World….one person and one City at a time.
As a province, British Columbia is now close to 98.8% FLUORIDE FREE, by choice and science!
To everyone who has -and continues – to work to help us in building a solid foundation, based on finding the truth and facts….
THANK-YOU

BUT…The shocking news from Ontario.
A petition is being introduced by Bob Delaney MPP (Member of the Provincial Parliament) into the Ontario legislature.

WE the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows: THAT the Ministries of the Government of Ontario amend all applicable legislation and regulations to make the fluoridation of municipal drinking water mandatory in all municipal water systems across the Province of Ontario.

It is hard to believe that the intelligent citizens of Ontario (including some of the most active and well-informed activists on this issue anywhere in the world) will allow this outrageous move to pass through the Ontario legislative assembly but we can’t afford to be complacent. Every fluoridation opponent living in Ontario needs to write or phone their MPP today and tell them not to be duped by this propaganda posing as science. More than anything they must be urged to exercise due diligence and see what the real science shows about the lack of effectiveness of swallowing fluoride and the real dangers swallowing fluoride poses especially to babies and young children. - See more at: http://iaomt.org/fluoridation-canada-agony-ecstasy/#sthash.xb18f0v3.dpuf

- See more at: http://iaomt.org/fluoridation-canada-agony-ecstasy/#sthash.xb18f0v3.dpuf

Friday, December 26, 2014

FluorideAlert.org

Fluoridegate: An American
Tragedy

In 1977 the US Congress mandated the
National Toxicology Program to conduct animal studies to determine if fluoride
causes cancer. Battelle Columbus Laboratories were contracted to perform the
studies that began in 1985 and ran for 2 years. In 1988 Battelle submitted their
final report that included the finding of a dose-dependent increase of a rare
liver
cancer (hepatocholangiocarcinoma) in male &
female mice and a small but statistically significant dose-related increase in
osteosarcomas in male rats but not in the female rats. For the rare liver
cancer, the first scientist to describe this cancer said that Battelle made a
correct diagnosis. However, this rare liver cancer was reclassified by a
government review panel as a non-cancer and one of the osteosarcomas was
downgraded leading to the classification of “equivocal evidence of cancer”.
There were also increases in oral and thyroid cancers, but they were not
considered statistically significant.The politics that raged around this study.

William Marcus, the senior scientist in
the Office of Drinking Water at the Environmental Protection Agency, expressed
concerns about the “systematic downgrading” of cancers in the 1990 published
study and requested that the EPA assemble an independent board of pathologists
and others to review the data produced in the study. In the 2013 documentary
Fluoridegate: An American Tragedy, Marcus has this to say about the
study:

… rats got cancer of the bone and they
got a very unusual cancer of the liver. And that was extremely surprising. First
of all to produce cancer of the bone in rodents is never seen because the time
that you have between birth and death of a rodent is only 3 ½ to four years and
it usually takes longer than that to produce a cancer in bone. The cancer of the
liver is extremely rare … and the fact that it happened meant that it was
significant. This doesn’t happen. I wrote this memo in which I claimed that I
thought fluoride was a carcinogen and that we had as much evidence with the
animal studies to show that it was a carcinogen as we had with any of the other
compounds [that EPA studied] and therefore should be treated as
such.

Also, three out of four in-vitro tests
proved fluoride to be mutagenic, which Marcus said supported “the conclusion
that fluoride is a probable human carcinogen.” The internal memorandum that
Marcus wrote was leaked to the press. It caused embarrassment to senior EPA
officials and Marcus was fired.“AN ENEMY OF THE STATE”

The National Whistleblowers Association
represented Marcus in his two trials against the EPA and they won both. The EPA
was forced to pay Marcus’ legal fees, 2 ½ years of back pay, and an undisclosed
sum for damages to his reputation.
In the documentary Fluoridegate,
produced in 2013, Stephen Kohn of the National Whistleblowers Association,
stated:

… I do not know why the agency (EPA) did
what it did to Dr Marcus. But I do represent whistleblowers and I can tell you
they went after Dr Marcus with a vengeance, a vengeance. He was a board
certified toxicologist with years of seniority, the most respected toxicologist
in the agency with an international reputation. When he wrote that memo they
went after him like he was an enemy of the state. They just hammered, and
hammered, and hammered, and they went way over the line by destroying evidence
and obstructing justice. And even after we won the first case where he was
ordered reinstated they went after him again. And even though there were 2 court
rulings finding retaliation they never touched or disciplined those agency
officials involved. This case marks a black mark on the EPA and raises
fundamental issues about scientific freedom and about fluoride and why this
agency went against one of its most respected scientists on that
issue.

Robert Reich as Secretary of Labor in the
Clinton administration upheld the decision of the Administrative Law Judge in
1994 who said that “the true reason for the discharge was retaliation.” Reich
wrote that he found particularly disturbing that the trumped-up charges against
Marcus were accepted by his supervisors “in the absence of any convincing
documentation.”
Tomorrow, Dr
Hirzy will give more details of EPA’s lack of scientific integrity on the issue
of fluoride’s toxicity and its willingness to put politics over science on the
fluoridation debate.

Thursday, December 25, 2014

MK Irmak, IS Ozcelik, A Kaya. Fluoride toxicity and new-onset diabetes in
Finland: a hypothesis. Journal of Experimental & Integrative Medicine; 2014,
Vol. 4 Issue 1, p3-8
The incidence of type 1 diabetes (T1D) has increased substantially in Finland, but the exact trigger for the onset of T1D is still unknown. We know that use of amoxicillin and anti-cariogenic fluoride tablets is a common practice for children in Finland. It seems that beta-cell destruction is initiated by modification of the proinsulin by combined effects of fluoride(F2) and amoxicillin. Amoxicillin especially when used together with clavulanic acid results in an acid environment around the beta-cells that promotes the conversion of F2 to hydrogen fluoride (HF). Unlike F2, HF can diffuse easily into the beta-cell cytosol. Because the cytosol has a neutral pH, virtually all HF reverts to F2 in the cytosol and F2 cannot easily diffuse out of the cell. Exposure to excess F2 promotes proinsulin covalent dimerization and simultaneously hyperexpression of MHC Class I molecules. Proinsulin dimers then migrate to the cell membrane with MHC class I molecules, accumulate at the beta-cell membrane and produces a powerful immunogenic stimulus for the cytotoxic T-cells. Production of cytotoxic cytokines from the infiltrating T-cells initiates the destruction of beta-cells. In Finnish children, this might be helped along by a higher beta-cell activity and by a reactive thymus-dependent immune system induced by higher levels of thyroid hormones and calcitonin respectively. After repeated similar attacks, more and more effector T-cells are raised and more and more beta-cells are destroyed, and clinical diabetes occurs.

Wednesday, December 24, 2014

Did you know that fluoride bio-accumulates within the body? This means that the more you drink or eat – the more it will accumulate in body tissues. The thyroid is especially damaged by fluoride exposure because its store of iodine… Continue...

Tuesday, December 23, 2014

The first in a series of major campaigns to halt the construction of four proposed dosing facilities in the northern rivers kicked off Monday morning in Clunes.

Campaigner Al Oshlack said, ‘Notwithstanding the overwhelming scientific documentation of adverse health impacts of fluoridated water to the the community, a recent spill in Dungog [in the upper Hunter region] has highlighted the the dangers that fluoride poses to the environment.

Spill at Dungog

‘The spill at Dungog was investigated by the EPA, who have not proceeded with any prosecution of the culprit, Hunter Water.

‘This shows that the authorities are disregarding any regulatory responsibility to bring to heel blatant acts of pollution. There is no safety in these plants and over the last 12 months the dosing plant at Casino has had numerous breakdowns. Mr Oshlack says a blockade camp will be set up at Corndale, where construction of the biggest dosing plant has commenced.
Byron Shire is not included in the fluoridation plans.
For more email al.oshlack@ijan.com.au.

Monday, December 22, 2014

Health

How influenza vaccines halt flu infections

Dated: 2014-12-22

ISLAMABAD: Vaccines are so effective at halting disease that they confer total immunity, say vaccine advocates.

"Take a flu shot and you won't get the flu!" Both flu shots and MMR vaccines are so safe and effective that everybody should be forced to take them, they insist.And why? Because they claim all those un-vaccinated people will spread disease to the vaccinated people!
Wasn't their whole argument about vaccines based on the idea that they confer total immunity to those who take them? Well, if that's true then they should have no fear whatsoever of un-vaccinated people!
According to vaccine promoters, if you take a flu shot vaccine, that means you can run around and drench yourself in flu viruses with total immunity. You can lick dirty doorknobs, shake hands with people who just wiped their runny noses, and even touch filthy drooling babies right before you eat a sandwich with your contaminated hands. Thanks to the vaccine, you're now bulletproof!
So why worry at all about un-vaccinated people infecting you? Vaccines cause brain damage: The vaccine logic just doesn't add up. There's a reason for that, of course: Vaccines make you stupid.
The chemical adjuvants added to vaccines actually cause neurological damage and interfere with healthy cognitive function. That's why brain-damaged people who take vaccines -- also known as Vaccine Zombies -- can't work out the simple logic explained above.
It's also why people who take vaccines are easily fooled into taking yet more vaccines. The critical thinking parts of their brains have been impaired, and they also have trouble with math and finances.
Did you know that two-thirds of Americans cannot explain how compound interest works? Try to explain fundamental concepts of fractional-reserve banking to your average vaccine consumer and you'll quickly discover just how brain damaged they really are.
Vaccines, fluoride, MSG and toxic heavy metals all work together in our modern world to chemically lobotomize the masses, turning them into drooling (useful) idiots who are just barely smart enough to punch a clock and operate some machinery on the job, but not nearly smart enough to realize how much they're all being ripped off by the Fed's money creation schemes that devalue the currency.
In fact, you might say that a vaccine-impaired population is absolutely essential for the existence of a police state government that relies on the poor cognitive function of its own citizens to maintain power and control over them. If people could actually do math, for example, they'd be marching in Washington right now -- just over the national debt if nothing else.
Vaccine zealots are time travelers (in their own minds): Another especially hilarious truism about flu shots is that they only work if you go back in time to the year before and expose yourself to last year's flu viruses. That's because each year's flu shot is made from the circulating viral strains found last year, not this year.
Viruses mutate rapidly, resulting in structural changes that often circumvent immune system antibodies, especially if those antibodies were created in response to exposure of a different strain. So getting injected with last year's viral strains is only useful if you're a time traveler with a time machine in your living room. Wanna relive the flu season of 2007? No problem! The vaccine companies have those strains readily available for you. Just crank up your time-traveling gizmo that you bought on eBay and you're ready to roll!
But if you're looking to protect yourself in the present (or the near future), getting injected with last year's influenza strain is about as idiotic as thinking you can beat the stock market by buying a crystal ball off eBay.
99% of the vaccine-taking public are delusional: What makes this all so hilarious? Well, for starters, flu shots only prevent flu symptoms in 1 out of 100 people who take them.
This means that 99% of flu take takers are delusional, living in a medical wonderland complete with fairies, unicorns and leprechauns who magically appear to defend them against influenza infections.
Perhaps more hilariously, 99% of the doctors and pharmacists are also delusional because they promote flu shots even when there is absolutely no scientific evidence to support the idea that they really work. There are no credible clinical trials performed on any flu vaccines before they are rolled out, did you know? Sure, the drug companies inject a few dozen volunteers with the shot and watch for symptoms over a period of 14 days or so, but that's not a real clinical trial (too small, too short, and it's all funded by the vaccine companies anyway).
Not surprisingly, nobody in the field of medicine bothers to test the efficacy of flu shots versus vitamin D supplements, because they know vitamin D would vastly out-perform flu shots in its ability to prevent influenza infections.
That's the beauty of flu shots: They need no proof! Because the people who take them will convince themselves that the flu shots are working, even when they're the ones getting sick all the time.
Meanwhile, the people who are NOT getting sick tend to be the people who are taking vitamin D supplements, who are drinking immune-boosting herbal tea, and who lead healthy lifestyles. That's what really works to prevent the flu... no vaccine necessary!
So watch out for the loopy logic and twisted minds of flu shot promoters. These people are a bit lacking in the brains department, with a few shelves missing from their cognitive library. A few fries short of a Happy Meal. In a room full of chimpanzees, they'd be the last to escape.
These are not the best and brightest that humanity has to offer, that's for sure. No wonder vaccines are now being used to promote infertility, because even Bill Gates admits that the globalists don't want these people to reproduce.

FluorideAlert.org

$60 Million in Taxpayer Dollars Targeted
to Promote US Fluoridation

While you may currently live in a state
that does not mandate fluoridation, and a community that does not practice
fluoridation, it doesn’t mean that you’re safe from the threat of forced
fluoridation. We have already described the
lengths that the promoters of fluoridation will go to, and the huge amounts of
money they will spend in their effort to fluoridate every public water supply in
the U.S., but a relatively new threat has emerged that could make the campaign
much more difficult for all of us. The Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC) is providing $6.2
million dollars in grants annually for the
next 4 years to 21 states to “improve state oral health services…such as
community water fluoridation.” Meanwhile, the CDC reports that at least
41% of
children aged 12-15 years of age have dental fluorosis (with
another 19.7% in the “questionable” range) for a possible 60% of this age group
with dental fluorosis, caused by overexposure to fluoride.

Sunday, December 21, 2014

Saturday, December 20, 2014

FluorideAlert.org

Bob Delany, MPP an embarrassment to
Ontario

Bob Delaney is the Member of the Ontario
Provincial Parliament who is trying to introduce mandatory fluoridation into
Ontario. This is what he says about people opposed to fluoridation ( see:
http://www.bobdelaney.com/fluoride/, also see his Facebook
page):

"There is a
vocal group of nutheads and fanatics that use junk science, myth, paranoia and
downright misinformation to suggest that fluoride is harmful. They are dead
wrong. Don’t believe their hysterical
claims…"

Who is Bob talking about here?
Is he talking
about Dr. Hardy Limeback one of Canada’s leading dental researchers and
co-author of the landmark
review by the National Research Council of the National Academies (NRC,
2006)?
Is he talking
about the 15 scientists who appear on the 28-minute video
Professional Perspectives on Water
Fluoridation?
Is he talking
about the three authors of The Case Against Fluoride (Chelsea Green,
2010): myself, Professor James Beck, MD PhD and Spedding Micklem, DPhil
(Oxon)?

Where are the peer-reviewed and published studies
to back up the following ridiculous claim by Bob?

"In every community in Canada that has
discontinued the safe and effective treatment of municipal drinking water with
fluoride, rates of cavities and tooth decay have shot up within two years.
Calgary Alberta, Dorval Quebec and Windsor Ontario are such examples of
stupidity trumping common sense and sound
science."

See this video for
additional background on Bob Delaney’s petition for mandatory
fluoridation.

I suspect we are in for more of this
ridiculous nonsense with the promoters of fluoridation willing to pour millions
of dollars into propaganda and using politicians like Bob to push it onto his
colleagues and an unsuspecting public, neither of which are being informed by
the mainstream media. This again underlines the importance of groups like
Canadians Opposed to Fluoridation (COF-COF) and the Fluoride Action Network who
are trying to do what the media are not doing: educate the public. But that
takes money.

A new brain study from Harvard (Choi et al. 2015) has prompted Phillipe Grandjean, author of Only One Chance, (Oxford Universtiry Press, 2013) to challenge the spin being used by fluoridation promoters to downplay the studies that have found an association between exposure to fluoride and lowered IQ. This commentary (Mottled fluoride debate) appears on Grandjean’s website (Chemical Brain Drain) and is printed in full below. Grandjean explains that for the children tested,

“Their lifetime exposures to fluoride from drinking water covered the full range allowed in the US. Among the findings, children with fluoride-induced mottling of their teeth – even the mildest forms that appears as whitish specks on the enamel – showed lower performance on some neuropsychological tests. This observation runs contrary to popular wisdom that the enamel effects represent a cosmetic problem only and not a sign of toxicity. At least one of five American children has some degree of mottling of their teeth.”

Canada - Petition To Make Fluoridation Mandatory Has Surprising Amount Of Signatures

Friday, December 19, 2014

When you consider that they have money to burn you can understand why fluoridation promoters believe that they can win this issue without the science to demonstrate that the practice is safe, effective or cost-effective. However, recent moves by fluoridation zealots suggest that they are risking everything to keep this foolish practice going. These gamblers are literally going for broke.
Their moves are meant to counter the recent string of local and national victories that have been achieved throughout the fluoridating world. The pro-fluoridation strategy: if you are losing locally (where citizens can educate themselves and their decision-makers) then go nationally, where you can take full advantage of the weight of your financial superiority and the influence of your Public Health authority that you can exercise at the highest levels of government and the media.

The danger of course in this pro-fluoridation strategy (from their perspective) is that it makes fluoridation into a national issue, allowing more and more open-minded and intelligent people to see this practice for the huge scam it is. Also it will highlight the decline in the competence of Public Health personnel in fluoridating countries. We have given examples below from Ontario, NZ and the UK, but first here is an update on our Fundraiser.3) In the UK, after the long and very successful battle to keep fluoridation out of Southampton, the newly formed agency Public Health England is stepping up efforts to fluoridate communities throughout England. The first battle is shaping up in Bedford, UK. Meanwhile, the pro-fluoridation forces have nobbled leaders of the Labor party who have pledged to support fluoridation if they win the next election. The leadership probably believes what the dental lobby tells them, namely that this will help children from low-income families. If only these “leaders” would get one of their aides to read the literature on fluoride’s ability to lower IQ, they might appreciate that the last children who need their IQ lowered are children from low-income families.

Justice David Collins has taken it upon himself to advise the NZ Ministry of Health's legal team on how best to circumvent the Judicial Review before him, regarding fluoridation in New Zealand. It appears the Judge is well aware that the appeal by New Health New Zealand would be bound to find that fluoridation chemicals should indeed be declared a medicine. To get around this inevitable ruling, the judge has advised the Ministry of Health to ask the government to make fluoridation chemicals exempt from the Medicines Act.........

9. Fluoride, bromide, and chloride coming from your diet, fluoridated water, toothpaste, or other environmental exposures, can interfere with the iodine your thyroid needs to function. (7) If you are having a hard time regulating your thyroid function, even with medications and a supportive doc, look for sources of these in your life and try to reduce/eliminate exposure.

Thursday, December 18, 2014

FLUORIDEALERT.ORG

A new
brain study from Harvard (Choi et al. 2015) has prompted Phillipe Grandjean,
author of Only One Chance, (Oxford Universtiry Press, 2013) to challenge
the spin being used by fluoridation promoters to downplay the studies that have
found an association between exposure to fluoride and lowered IQ. This
commentary (Mottled fluoride debate) appears on Grandjean’s website (Chemical
Brain Drain) and is printed in full below. Grandjean explains that for the
children tested,

“Their lifetime exposures to fluoride
from drinking water covered the full range allowed in the US. Among the
findings, children with fluoride-induced mottling of their teeth – even the
mildest forms that appears as whitish specks on the enamel – showed lower
performance on some neuropsychological tests. This observation runs contrary
to popular wisdom that the enamel effects represent a cosmetic
problem only and not a sign of toxicity. At least
one of
five American children has some
degree of mottling of their teeth.” (my emphasis, PC)

I would add that this comment further
underlines the “mistake” being perpetrated by the officials at the EPA’s Office
of Water who are incorrectly treating severe dental fluorosis as the most
sensitive endpoint of fluoride’s toxicity in their risk assessment to determine
a safe water goal (the MCLG) for fluoride. The end point of most concern should
be lowered IQ.

Grandjean states, “Prevention of chemical brain drain should be considered
at least as important as protection against caries.”

This very important commentary from
Grandjean has more than justified the nearly 19 years effort by the Fluoride
Action Network to draw the world’s attention to fluoride’s neurotoxicity (see
www.FluorideAlert.org/issues/health/brain). Now that leading researchers in
neuro-toxicology like Grandjean and Bellinger (another co-author of the most
recent Choi paper) are articulating our long-held concerns perhaps more people
will listen. But for people to listen they have to be told. The mass media is
not telling them but we are. To continue this important educational effort
(which has included paying to have many of the 42 IQ studies to be translated
from Chinese) takes money.............

Will he see it? Will I get a reply?

I’ve just learned that MP Andy Burnham has vowed to make water fluoridation a priority if labour wins back power at next year’s general election, telling Dentistry: ‘We need to be bolder.’

Is he aware that he will lose many votes? It is not what people want, there are better ways to treat these children. In Southampton we have shown that there is solid opposition to enforced medication when people are aware of all the facts, not just the propaganda that the British Fluoridation Society churn out, an organization that Andy Burnham was at one time Vice chairman.

The NHS has already wasted £1,000,000 fighting and losing the battle to force fluoridation on us. See Echo headlines.

Israel has banned fluoridation completely isn’t about time we did in the UK?

The mayor’s decision to put fluoride in the water supply on Jan. 1 has not been democratically approved by the community of Sheridan and Sheridan County. Why haven’t city leaders considered the right to vote on this issue? The citizens of Sheridan County voted fluoride out of the water in 1953.

New councilmen sympathetic to people who oppose fluoridation of the water will be sworn into office on Jan. 5, yet Mayor Heath could not wait.

Not only will there be fluoride added to the water, but also close to ten other chemicals, including arsenic.

The decision is not democratic, doesn’t represent the people, but rather plutocratic-government by the privileged.

I would then ask: Who is paying city leadership to push the fluoridation of water into law? We the people need a choice now in 2014.

The Pew Foundation is paying the Children's Dental Health Project to push fluoridation on people. The American Dental Association is pouring $500,000 in a social media campaign as a PR stunt to convince legislators and their constituents that they need fluoridation when they don't. We don't don't know who's pushing the buttons of your legislators - but there's lots of money flowing into promoting, instigating (many times in secret) and preserving fluoridation. Boyne City, Michigan legislators were forced to reverse their decision to stop fluoridation after a well-funded campaign by fluoridationists overwhelmed the pocketbooks of those who opposed fluoridation.

However, both Portland Oregon and Wichita Kansas were able to fight off the fluoridationists even though they were way outspent. In the end the truth will come out. Fluoridation is an outdated public health blunder that needs to be abandonec

All Civil Engineers and all water managers know that people drink only 1/2% of the water they use. The rest goes directly down the drain in toilets, showers, dishwashers, etc.So for each $1000 of fluoride added annually to drinking water, people drink $5 and $995 is wasted down the drain. Children would drink only $0.50 (fifty cents).

That would be comparable to buying one gallon of milk, using six-and-one-half drops of it, and pouring the rest of the gallon in the sink.

Fluoride in the Water Isn't Going to Hurt You

You have to listen to this, fluoridation is wonderful according to him. You can't get enough even if children are getting fluorosis in unfluoridated towns.
I find it disturbing that experts in the same field arrive at opposite conclusions. Although looking at the world with all its divisions I suppose I shouldn't be.

Ruakura Sayer and Jane Beck want the council to stop adding fluoride to Thames' drinking water.

The Thames-Coromandel District Council has voted for a binding referendum to be held next year to allow the Thames community to vote on the future of fluoride in the town's water.

A fluoride consultation report presented by The Thames Community Board (TCB) dated November 10, recommended there be no consultation around fluoride in the 2015 long term plan (LTP).

The council said it had received 173 letters since then urging it to to honour its commitment to consult on the matter of fluoridation.

Councillor Murray McLean said he could not support an open motion.

"Let the community have their say... I don't believe there is any other way," he said.

Thames is the only town in the Coromandel Peninsula to have fluoride added to its water. It costs $2300 per year.

A dozen anti-fluoride supporters attended yesterday's council meeting to talk about their disappointment about the use of fluoride.

Dr Jane Beck said the TCB consultations over the 2013 holiday period caught her and others in the Fluoride Free Thames group unaware and they felt unprepared.

"I can understand why any councillor would rather avoid consultation on fluoridation and wish to hand responsibility to the [Ministry of Health] but the fact remains that fluoridation is not mandated in New Zealand because current legislation prohibits that," she said.

In May last year, mayor Glenn Leach used his casting vote and voted in favour of keeping fluoride in the water but agreed that a referendum does need to take place.

He said he was personally against fluoride in the water but voted for it in support of the Thames Community Board.

The fluoride debate will be up for review next year as part of the annual plan 2015.

Wednesday, December 17, 2014

Canada - Fluoride Officially A Thing Of The Past

The question of fluoride in the city's water has been out to rest. Fluoride was introduced into the city's drinking water with a resolution of Council back in 1954. The pros and cons of fluoride in the water were recently debated and the former Council opted to have it as a referendum question on the ballot for the civic election. Residents voted nearly 54% to remove the fluoride. The final decision was not binding on Council,

USA - Alex Jones: Fluoride And Vaccines Are Greater Threat Than Guns

On his “Infowars” radio talk show this week, conspiracy theorist Alex Jones warned his listeners that the federal government plans to disarm gun owners and militarize the police in preparation for a war against right-wing activists. Jones explained that “the government wants all the guns” even though the “few right-wing nut bags” in American kill fewer people than bees.

“Listen, the government wants all the guns, it’s illegitimate, and it says we’re bad having them,” he said. “We have a few right-wing nut bags who are gonna shoot stuff up? Yeah. They’re less dangerous than honeybees, they kill two hundred-something a year. Right-wingers kill a couple dozen. I don’t want to kill all of the honeybees because they kill people sometimes.”

He then pointed his finger at what he considered to be the true evils plaguing American society: “What’s dangerous is the pharmaceuticals, what’s dangerous is the vaccines, what’s dangerous is the high fructose corn syrup, what’s dangerous is the fluoride. That’s killing millions of people a year, it’s worse than tobacco.”

Tuesday, December 16, 2014

Labour has vowed to make water fluoridation a priority if it wins back power at next year’s general election, telling Dentistry: ‘We need to be bolder.’

In an exclusive interview with Dentistry magazine, the party’s health spokesman pledged to try to persuade local health chiefs to finally ‘grasp the nettle’ on the controversy.

Andy Burnham said: ‘It’s one of the simplest and easiest ways to improve the health of children, as well as improving their self-confidence and self-esteem.

‘There is clearly no public health argument against it, not a shred of evidence that it damages health.
‘If there was, there would be campaigns about it in the West Midlands.
‘We need to be bolder on public health – and, to my mind, that includes water fluoridation.’
The comments come after the only proposed water fluoridation scheme anywhere in England – in south Hampshire – collapsed after fierce local opposition.

Public Health England (PHE) pulled the plug despite its firm belief in the benefits of water fluoridation, because of the lack of support from Southampton City Council.

The scheme was proposed as long ago as 2009 – to add fluoride to tap water for about 200,000 people in the city and wider south Hampshire – but was never implemented.
The decision was seen as crushing hopes of extending water fluoridation because – with the axing of strategic health authorities – decisions now rest with local councils, directly answerable to suspicious voters.

But Mr Burnham said he did not share that pessimism, arguing other areas with worse problems of rotting children’s teeth were more likely to act than Southampton.
He identified Greater Manchester as the most likely, pointing out north west hospitals carry out seven times more tooth extractions on children, under general anaesthetic, than in the fluoridated West Midlands.

Mr Burnham said: ‘I believe they had a strong case in Southampton, but the geography of that area made it difficult.
‘There aren’t the same health problems in Hampshire.
‘I hope Greater Manchester will now pick up the cudgels.
‘And we may find it’s more likely now, because councils have more experience of bringing forward an argument and winning it.
‘I don’t see the change as a negative step, because the health service didn’t go for it.
‘And Greater Manchester can use the West Midlands as a comparator.’
Mr Burnham said he had ‘always been a believer’ in water fluoridation, having led the 2003 campaign to change the law to take decisions out of the hands of the privatised water companies.
He said he would not put direct pressure on councils – which had responsibility for public health – but he would encourage them to ‘grasp the nettle’.
There was a ‘small civil liberties argument’, but, Mr Burnham added: ‘For me, that is offset massively by the benefits for children.
‘If kids have very bad teeth, it damages their confidence.
‘They can feel self-conscious – and some just don’t have the same support from parents, when it comes to brushing teeth.’

It was Andy Burnham that started the whole fluoridation fiasco, losing £1,000,000 wasn't enough for him. As he was a member of the British Fluoridation Society I suppose he has to promote it.